The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1887-07-21
RAILROAD TICKETS.
The, Interstate Commerce Commission
Holds that tho Act does not Compel Ono a,
Company to scll tho Tickets. OF An.
othor..Goad Nows for, scalpers.

WASHINGTON, D. O., July 20.-Decisiont
were rendered by the Interstate Com
merce Commission to-day. The most i'm
portant was one in relation 10 the payment
Of commissions BY one road to agents o.
another and connecting road for sales o.
through tickets. The points in dispute
grew out Of the commission and anti
commission fight between the seaboard
trunk lines and oome OF their western
connections. The following three cases
were disposed Of in the one opinion:
The Chicago & Alton Railroad Company
against tho Pennsylvania Company; the
aame against the Pennsylvania Railroad
Company; the Chicago, Rock Ialand 4
Pacific Railroad Company against the
New York Central & Hudson Railroad
Company. The following synopsis con.
tains the more Important pointa'of tho
opinion which ia very long: &,
The complaints in these cases are
founded upon the third section OF the act
TO regulate commerce., and charge viola
tons OF that section by the defendant
companice in refusing certain facilities for
receiving, forwarding and delivering pas.
sepgers to complainanta lines, consisting
Of through or coupon tickets, which being
afforded to other and competing COM
panies, give, the companies allege, m.
reasonable preference to those companies.
THE OLD sQuADBLE.
The material facts found by the com.
mission are recitsd at length in the opin.
ion. They show that for several years
prior to the time when the act took effect,
all the railroad companies Of
the country, including the complainants
and defendants, paid commissions. The
defendant companies, and some others,
for about two years have made earnest
efforts to abate the practice Of paying
commissions. About month before
the act to q regulate commerce be.
came operative, the defendant companies
took etepB to procure agreements with
their connecting companies to abolish the
commission business altogether. With
this end in view, they sent printed circu.
lara on or about the 10th OF March last to
their connecting companies, expressing
their Willingness to continue to act as
agents in the sale Of through tickets, and
stating the nature OF the agreement. The
circular Of the defendant companies con-
tained'a condition prohibiting the pay
ment of commissions by other companies
to it's agents. -.@ag q 5s. ft5iy
The complainant companies refused to
enter into the agreement proposed. On
account OF their refusal the defendants,
after the fourth Of April last, refused to
sell through tickets over complainants
roads from Chicago and st. Louis to Kan
sas City and still refuse solely for those
reasons. On these facts the compliments
aver that the defendants refuse to afford
them reasonable, proper and rightiul
facilities for recovering, forwarding and
delivering passengers, and give undue pre-
ference to competing roads in contravsn.
ion Of the provisions OF the act to regulate
commerce. The defendants deny that
they have violated the provisions OF the
act, and claim that they; have exclusive
right to control their agents, to fix tho
amount Of their compensation and to psy
Themselves. The odeuses OF which the
commission hiss cognizance arc anything
done or omitted to be done in contraven-
ton Of provisions OF the act to regulate
Interstate Commerce. -.l,ss
The law in this instance does not in
terms require one railroad company to
sell through tickets over the road OF an
other railroad company. 2sf
( NOT OBLIGED TO DO BUSINESS TOGETHER.
s In the absence Of statutory authority,
one railroad company can only sell tickets
and check baggage over the road OF an
other railroad company by agreement. It
being, therefore, under our statute matter
Of mutual agreement whether. coupon
through tickets shall be sold by 9 railroad
over the roads Of other compa-
MES, lit follows that the forms OF auch
tickets and the manner OF their sale are
matters Of agreement by the companies
II companies can agree upon
their tariffs, the form OF their tickets and
how they should be sold, they have the
right to do so, ind by such agreement be-
come interstate carriers, but If they can
not agree the oct does not undertake to
coerce them to do business together upon
terms that may be justly objectionable or
injurious. Ne 9si,